[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Artistic and LGPL compatibility in jar files

Hi Anthony!
On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 20:25:22 +0000, "Anthony W. Youngman" <debian@thewolery.demon.co.uk> wrote:

>>Right, this is section 6 of GPLv2 of section 10 of GPLv3. Let's quote
>>the latter:
>>    10. Automatic Licensing of Downstream Recipients.
>>    Each time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically
>>  receives a license from the original licensors, to run, modify and
>>  propagate that work, subject to this License. [...]
>>> And I granted the licence as "v2 or later".
>>The text of the GPL says "subject to this License", i.e. GPLv3, not
>>"subject to all Licenses". So I don't see how your conclusion follows.

> As I said in another post, you're confusing the licence *grant* with the 
> licence *itself*.

> Let's say I write some software and - as I would - I stick a notice that 
> says "this software is licenced v2 or v3". That is my grant.


> You now look at the code. You like v3, so you say "v3 is my licence" and 
> distribute it as v3. 


> Your recipients also get *my* grant, so any one of 
> them can say "actually, I like v *2* so I'll take that as my licence".

Why do you think that my recipients will get your entire grant? GPLv3
only says that they will get your grant for _this_ License, i.e. GPLv3.

> Now let's say you write some code, add it to my work to make a 
> derivative work and, being a trusting bloke your grant says your code is 
> "v3 or later".
> You can choose to distribute the code under v2 or v3, because you need 
> to comply with my grant for my code. You can do what you like with your 
> own code.
> Your recipients, now, can ONLY distribute under "V3 ONLY". They can 
> choose v2 for my code, but that won't let them distribute yours, so they 
> can't distribute the derivative work under v2. They can choose v4 (when 
> it comes out) for your code, but that won't let them distribute mine, so 
> they can't use that for the derivative work. They CAN choose v3 which is 
> valid for both your code, and mine, so the project COPYING file should 
> say "the only licence valid for the work as a whole is v3, but 
> individual parts have their own licence and may be copied under a 
> different licence, if appropriate".

I agree here.

Alexander Cherepanov

Reply to: